Tre Cavalli Pty Limited v The Berry Rural Co-operative Society Limited [2012] NSWCA 187

Tre Cavalli Pty Limited v The Berry Rural Co-operative Society Limited [2012] NSWCA 187

The stay was refused because the judgments in favour of Fort Dodge were regularly made and entered, were not challenged in the appeal, and did not form part of the subject matter of the appeal. The Court found no sufficient factual basis to infer that Fort Dodge's winding up proceedings were brought to stifle the appeal, and even if such a purpose were assumed it could not justify staying execution of unchallenged judgments.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application for Stay Pending Determination of Appeal / Notice of Motion Filed by the Appellant on 14 June 2012 in the Court of Appeal
Outcome
The notice of motion filed by the appellant on 14 June 2012 was dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['stay of Execution Pending Appeal' 'statutory Demand' 'winding Up in Insolvency' 'unchallenged Judgment Debts' 'costs Assessment Certificates']
['civil Procedure' 'corporations Law' 'appellate Procedure'] ['stay of Execution Pending Appeal' 'statutory Demand' 'winding Up in Insolvency' 'unchallenged Judgment Debts' 'costs Assessment Certificates']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application for Stay Pending Determination of Appeal / Notice of Motion Filed by the Appellant on 14 June 2012 in the Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court of Appeal should stay execution of two District Court judgments in favour of Fort Dodge where those judgments were not challenged in the appeal.' "Whether the pendency of Cavalli's appeal against Berry and the possibility of a winding up order against Cavalli provided a basis for staying Fort Dodge's judgments." "Whether an inference should be drawn that Fort Dodge pursued winding up proceedings to stifle Cavalli's appeal."]

Ratio Decidendi

The stay was refused because the judgments in favour of Fort Dodge were regularly made and entered, were not challenged in the appeal, and did not form part of the subject matter of the appeal. The Court found no sufficient factual basis to infer that Fort Dodge's winding up proceedings were brought to stifle the appeal, and even if such a purpose were assumed it could not justify staying execution of unchallenged judgments.

Court Disposition

The notice of motion filed by the appellant on 14 June 2012 was dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The notice of motion filed by the appellant on 14 June 2012 is dismissed with costs.']